Cheri L' Bradish, Ph'D', Department of Sport Management Brock University

1
Cheri L. Bradish, Ph.D., Department of Sport
ManagementBrock University
Lessons from BIG and little BrotherAn
Examination of Regional Sport Councils
in the United States

2

Regional Sport Councils
Defined

• 100 communities in the USA
• partners of local/regional governments
• also referred to as commission, authority,
  council, corporation, federation, foundation
• supported by the National Association
  of Sports Commissions (NASC)

3
Objectives
Regional Sport Councils

• to attract, stimulate, and promote sporting
  events and facilities
• to improve overall quality of life for host
  community, while contributing to actual economic
  impact
• to serve as recognizable and identifiable
  advocates and experts

4
Study Overview
Regional Sport Councils

• powerful, yet misunderstood sport organization
  (s)
• nationwide study
• Is there a difference in organization structure
  and characteristics between regional Sports
  Commissions which are large in size, versus
  those that are small in size, according to
  metropolitan area served?

5
Methods
Regional Sport Councils

• two-part SCOSS survey
• 86 active NASC members (77 response rate)
• balance between large (greater than one million)
  and small (less than 700,000) inhabitants
• 5.6 m 1 m (mean 1.9 m)
• 672,000 9,999 (mean
  317,128)

6
Large Sport Councils

7
Small Sport Councils

8
Results Structure
Regional Sport Councils

• similar findings for measures of organizational
  structure for large versus small sports councils
  (reflective of similar size of independent
  organizations)

9
Results Characteristics
Regional Sport Councils

• more small market councils are dependent on
  other government entities
• overall budget sources lodging/bed taxes,
  corporate partnerships
• internal bid activities/minimal external
  activities
• varying perceptions of success (small)
• economic impact important to both (large event
  hosting, small room nights)

10
Results General
Regional Sport Councils

• type independent (70.8 L 35.7 S), CVB (12.5
  L 42.9 S)
• 94 not-for-profit
• 77.2 lack amateur sport mandate
• mean annual budget (828,652 L 592,144 S)

11
Results Personnel
Regional Sport Councils

• full-time 6.63/5.11
• part-time 3.93/2.1
• interns 2.43/1.94
• volunteers 1400/250
• Bod 35/21

12
Results Budget ()
Regional Sport Councils

• lodging/bed tax 44.96/68.53
• corporate partnerships 41.61/33.27
• government assistance 36.67/28
• events revenue 22.67/13.66

13
Results Activities
Regional Sport Councils

• Internal
• Solicit bids (88/79)
• Writing bids (88/71)
• Presenting bids (83/75)
• Assembly bid team (83/68)
• Obtaining funding (75/79)
• External
• Facility management (17/29)
• LOC marketing (13/11)
• Ticket sales (8/14)
• Community recreation (8/18)
• Event management (8/7)

14
Conclusions
Regional Sport Councils

• similar in structure (regulated)
• strong community support as a means to social and
  economic development
• diverse activities
• beneficial to create an ongoing lobby unit
• resource dependent activities are
  outsourced/minimized yet should be enhanced, or
  better coordinated for communities

15
Recommendations
Regional Sport Councils

• examination of councils (budget/type)
• examination of the effectiveness of the bid and
  management activities performed
• community perception of the effectiveness and
  legacy of council
• volunteer capacity

16
Questions?